RollingBlockHeadMi wrote on Feb 4^th, 2024 at 5:18pm:


You should probably stick to posting the question once, instead of starting two identical threads here.

As to your question about are there differences?  Yes.  The frames have substantial dimensional differences, and the hammer and breechblock spurs are different.  The extractor system is also entirely different, as the #5 was made for rimless 7mm mauser cartridges.   

However, the breech blocks and hammers and all the working parts interchange easily between the two, if the extractor is changed accordingly.  If you're building a rifle, parts can easily be mixed and matched to come up with a complete rifle, with parts from almost any era of the full size rolling block.   

There are some different models, like the New York Contract rifles, and the Springfield rifles, that parts won't entirely interchange.  And a lot of the swedish and danish ones have some different pin retractor and extractor parts.  But, for the most part, the parts mostly interchange.

Sure shot wrote on Feb 4^th, 2024 at 7:40pm:


Barrel shank #1 is .975", #5 is 1.055".  Yes, the 1897 patent rifles have a sliding extractor.

Don't make too much about the #5 being stronger because of larger barrel and thicker receiver.

In reality, the original barrel size of .975" is more than adequate with modern barrel steel.  And, the receiver thickness around the barrel tenon isn't all that relevant; it's there to hold the barrel, not to hold in the pressure; that's the barrels job.  The #5 is also not symetrically thicker, so with hoop stress, a lot of the thicker receiver ring doesn't count anyway.   

The weak point of the rolling block is twofold:  One, it springs because of play and give in the breechblock/hammer assembly, and causes brass to stretch and give.  Two, it doesn't handle leaking gases well; which is particularly a problem with an action that allows brass to stretch and separate.  It routes leaking gases back into the shooters face, and if the primer ruptures, it can also blow the firing pin back and out, and/or blow the hammer back and allow the block to open; blowing gases and the ejected cartridge into the shooters face.

It's a perfectly safe and acceptable action, but needs to be held to less than about 35,000 psi in 30-30 size head cases, and 28,000 psi in .45-70 size cases.

There's a lot of people that have chambered high pressure rounds in one, and lived to tell about it.  The worst one I've seen was in 7mm mag.  But, it's not smart to do so.  It is literally an accident waiting to happen.

awp101 wrote on Feb 4^th, 2024 at 8:31pm:


And, Frank DeHaas was working with a different perspective than we have today, and his audience was returning servicemen from WWII.  They wanted rifles that were out of the reach of the average guy financially; and were doing all kinds of homemade solutions to get shootable rifles.  The level of risk they were willing to take, in the absence of alternatives was higher than we should take today.  Actions and rifles are plentiful, and affordable to most; there's absolutely no reason to take chances.

My firm belief is that DeHaa's recommendations are marginal for safety, and should be approached very conservatively.  He was a much better writer than gunsmith and firearms expert.  His drawings and rifle descriptions and his descriptive firearms knowledge are excellent, but his recommendations for safety are on the edge of safety.  The additional 50 years of age on the actions isn't really relevant, if properly cared for, they're unlikely to lose strength.

Thanks for the clarification ssdave and Otony.  I’m kicking around a .30-30 project which is why the “Danger Will Robinson!” alarm went off in my head when reading that.

ssdave, you have a vast amount of knowledge about these rolling block, and I appreciate you sharing this information very much.
Thanks

Some of the later #5s were chambered in 30-03 or 30-06. While I don't think it is a good idea to go that much it should not be a problem for a 30-30 which is less pressure than the 7X57. I have seen a few that will bend the base on 7X57 brass because the breach block is not square to the bore. For myself I went to 38-55 on a #5 because the 45-70 was getting to be to much recoil on my old shoulder. I have a #5 with a 45-90 barrel installed that was never finished. Anyone interested can contact me.